It seems to have lost the charm associated with Ferrari, and is slowly turning into a group of suits looking to promote Italian interests only.

The man at the brunt of all this is Alonso. If he can turn things around, get this Ferrari team working better and win a championship with them, it would be a great achievement. He has a lot of pressure at the moment on his shoulders, but he's done it before with Renault, and is very well capable of doing it again.

Benneton did just fine with the suit team promoting Italian interests only and Ferrari have been a suit team for some time since they have had to answer to FIAT.

The R25 was a leap forward with things like the V keel and the Michy's were on those years finally - Alonso is fast enough but don't give him credit for the R25's success (from the cars performance and engineering point of view). Alonso didn't exactly turn things around last year while other teams went forward and the other Renault powered team was winning races/podiums all year.

To say that Kimi never dedicated to Ferrari is rubish.How could he made so many fastest laps in the race. Ferrari never had the best car, so how could he did what he did effortlessly?At the technical meetings, if he never had a ggod direction, it is better to stay shut that do what Massa did, give fake directions just to pretend he understand something about car development.Ferrari just kept throwing the wrong parts in the car.

Ferrari was the best car in 2008. He simply couldn't beat Massa that season for some unknown reason.

To put things into perspective: Alonso has scored 98 points out of a possible 250. We know he doesn't have the best car but that is still dissapointing for someone so consistent in his championship-winning years.

Mclaren don't have the best car either, yet they score the most points. Ferrari was better than Mclaren at the beginning of the season and now they have an advantage of Mclaren again, so it's not a slow car.

Alonso is going to join the fight, there are still many races to go and many points to be gathered.

Not shady, but he's complaining about how the team treats him and when you consider how much love for Fernando there was in the Renault team, it seems strange.

In his defence, he was at the end of a difficult title fight in which the FIA took away his mass damper and his Monza qualifying slot so emotions will have been high. You can't blame the guy for reacting.

Its not too hard to see the problems he had at McLaren, he expected undisputed #1 status, Lewis would have none of it

To say that Kimi never dedicated to Ferrari is rubish.How could he made so many fastest laps in the race. Ferrari never had the best car, so how could he did what he did effortlessly?At the technical meetings, if he never had a ggod direction, it is better to stay shut that do what Massa did, give fake directions just to pretend he understand something about car development.Ferrari just kept throwing the wrong parts in the car.

The Ferrari was the fastest car in both 2007 and 2008, clearly the Red Bull is the fastest car this year

I wouldn't say Alesi... maybe Mansell, he also won his first race in a Ferrari.

Yes, his clumsy season reminds me of Nigel, fast but...

Fernando has a lot more brainpower at his disposal than Mansell.

I don't think there's a parallel from previous times. Since losing all their leaders the team have dumped too much expectation on the driver, IMO. There was only one Schumi, and even he needed Brawn and Todt.

Benneton did just fine with the suit team promoting Italian interests only and Ferrari have been a suit team for some time since they have had to answer to FIAT.

The R25 was a leap forward with things like the V keel and the Michy's were on those years finally - Alonso is fast enough but don't give him credit for the R25's success (from the cars performance and engineering point of view). Alonso didn't exactly turn things around last year while other teams went forward and the other Renault powered team was winning races/podiums all year.

Maybe I was not clear in my last post.Bennetton may have been promoting Italian interests, but their team wasnt turning into a single nationality entity at any moment in time. They had Symonds, Stepney, Brawn, Schumacher, running the show there, very much a professional unit based on competence alone and not nationality.

The Ferrari team at the moment seems to be concentrating on developing Italian talent at all levels starting from the driver down to the engineers. It is an ambitious project, but at the moment doesnt seem to be heading anywhere as far as their on track performance is concerned. They seem to lack the consistency and professionalism that was the hallmark of the Ferrari team from 97-06.

What a stupid statement has Tony Dodgins said about Alonso standing at the championship.
He justify that Alonso should be leading because of these because of that...bla bla bla..When he and Hamilton lost the championship Kimi wasnt and undeserved champion. ( telling you this cause i am Hamilton fan)
The one that leads is the one that should be leading, Alonso has have misfortunes and own errors as anyone else, he is where he is because him and his team and that's it. If Hamilton finish loosing the championship then he neither deserve it, so please Tony cut the crap and talk about the teams that have done the job.

What a stupid statement has Tony Dodgins said about Alonso standing at the championship.

I assume you are referring to this article (for Autosport subscribers only)

When you forget all the hoopla and look at the championship table, it is currently led by Lewis Hamilton with 145 points. Alonso is fifth with 98. There are such fine margins in F1 that if things had worked out in any way reasonably for Fernando over the past three races, he would be sitting there with 137 points and Hamilton would have 135.

Which is why, with nine races remaining, it would be unreasonable to expect Alonso's season to continue in similar vein. And why, with civil war at Red Bull and the McLaren pair split by just 12 points – one fourth place these days – it would be wrong to write Alonso out of the championship equation.

Seems like a pretty reasonable 'what if' article IMO as long as you read it as such.

Didn't think much to the "what ifs". For example, "if things had worked out in any way reasonably"? I guess this means no SC in Valencia or Silverstone - in which case, can we cancel the ones in Melbourne, China and Monaco that reduced the effect of his errors in those races in order to come up with our "WDC based on things working out reasonably"?

I note the wheelspin from lining up on the white stuff in Australia is also forgotten in the article.

Somehow, Turkey is a race where "something went wrong". That "something" appears to be "the Ferrari wasn't as fast as at most other races". Err, ok. That's odd enough alone, IMO, and only compounded by the failure to mention that Massa managed to qualify much higher and finish ahead.

I found it quite an unbalanced piece, to be honest.

The overall conclusion (it would be wrong to write Alonso out of the championship equation) I agree with. But the detail presented to support that conclusion seems exaggerated/one sided to me.

Didn't think much to the "what ifs". For example, "if things had worked out in any way reasonably"? I guess this means no SC in Valencia or Silverstone - in which case, can we cancel the ones in Melbourne, China and Monaco that reduced the effect of his errors in those races in order to come up with our "WDC based on things working out reasonably"?

I note the wheelspin from lining up on the white stuff in Australia is also forgotten in the article.

Somehow, Turkey is a race where "something went wrong". That "something" appears to be "the Ferrari wasn't as fast as at most other races". Err, ok. That's odd enough alone, IMO, and only compounded by the failure to mention that Massa managed to qualify much higher and finish ahead.

I found it quite an unbalanced piece, to be honest.

The overall conclusion (it would be wrong to write Alonso out of the championship equation) I agree with. But the detail presented to support that conclusion seems exaggerated/one sided to me.

Exactly, also ignoring the 2 podiums Lewis lost, unnecessary pitstop in Aus, rim failure in Barcelona, and dont forget Vettel who surely would be miles in front if not for misfortunes

The overall conclusion (it would be wrong to write Alonso out of the championship equation) I agree with. But the detail presented to support that conclusion seems exaggerated/one sided to me.

But I think that's exactly the point of the article. You can't undo what has been done of course, and we all know how they ended up, so instead you think about the small differences which might have been.

Ultimately his point is that Alonso in the Ferrari isn't far enough off the pace to be discounted. But that's a short article isn't it?

Written as an article on how the small things make the differences, and how if things had gone one way where they went the other, Alonso would be right up there at near the top of the WDC table, I would agree it would work. But the emotive langauge used in a couple of places (such as "By any standards that's an extraordinarily unfortunate run", "if things had worked out in any way reasonably") turns it from a "what might have been" into a "what should have been". The former would be a slant I'd thoroughly agree with, the latter not so much.

Hamilton breaks a rule, gets a drive-through, and loses nothing thanks to a leftfield strategy from Kobayashi.
The very next race Alonso break a rule, gets a drive-through, lo-and-behold he's at the very back of the field.

I think that's extraordinarily unfortunate, right there.

"...if things had worked out in any way reasonably" is less defensible but in the context of the article it's OK if a bit fanboy.

Hamilton breaks a rule, gets a drive-through, and loses nothing thanks to a leftfield strategy from Kobayashi.The very next race Alonso break a rule, gets a drive-through, lo-and-behold he's at the very back of the field.

I think that's extraordinarily unfortunate, right there.

"...if things had worked out in any way reasonably" is less defensible but in the context of the article it's OK if a bit fanboy.

I confess I didn't read the article but it looks to me that in his what if exercise the author only listed the unfortunate events and left out the fortunate ones like how extraordinarily lucky Alonso was in Monaco with the safety car in the first lap, lucky in Aus and lucky in China ?

I thought the point of the article was to show how Alonso's claim that the championship was still possible wasn't crazy. He has failed to capitalise on a lot of available points not because he's slow, but because 'other stuff' happened. Some within his power to change, but a lot outside. I don't agree that Montreal was 'appalling luck' so much as 'poor judgement' or even 'poor driving' which lost him two places, for example.

Oh well, I thought the article did a pretty reasonable job of focussing attention away from the championship table and incidents and onto the overall performance. Certainly if anyone thinks Alonso has lost his touch this year would do well to read it and try to see some of the results for what they were.

Didn't think much to the "what ifs". For example, "if things had worked out in any way reasonably"? I guess this means no SC in Valencia or Silverstone - in which case, can we cancel the ones in Melbourne, China and Monaco that reduced the effect of his errors in those races in order to come up with our "WDC based on things working out reasonably"?

felipe would have been a wdc if not for the SC in singapore, or for the engine blow in hungary, his own mistake in malaysia, or for glock holding hamilton 500 more meters,obviously arguments exist for the other side too

the what if championship would be probably tied with everybody on full points.alonso is not having his best season, that is right, but it's not like ferrari have done wonders and he's screwing up. he may have lost some points here and there but I don't think the car had any chance to lead the wdc until now

felipe would have been a wdc if not for the SC in singapore, or for the engine blow in hungary, his own mistake in malaysia, or for glock holding hamilton 500 more meters,obviously arguments exist for the other side too

the what if championship would be probably tied with everybody on full points.alonso is not having his best season, that is right, but it's not like ferrari have done wonders and he's screwing up. he may have lost some points here and there but I don't think the car had any chance to lead the wdc until now

Exactly what I am thinking. Alonso won the 2005 title, but what if Kimi didn't have all those 10 place grid drops, bla, bla. Nothing will change the fact that Alonso won the title. Every driver has good luck, and bad.

In the 'what if' category, Webber and Vettel SHOULD be MILES ahead of everyone. You can't 'what if' only one driver. The fact is that Ferrari have the 2nd fastest car (for a good portion of the season), but have not been able to score points at the same rate as McLaren (i say McLaren, because they definitely seem to have the knack this year of scoring higher than they 'should')

I think the point of the what ifs is to simply say that the second half of the season may well not follow the same pattern of the first, and therefore that 47 point deficit could well be made up. And from that angle, I think they're quite valid.

Exactly what I am thinking. Alonso won the 2005 title, but what if Kimi didn't have all those 10 place grid drops, bla, bla. Nothing will change the fact that Alonso won the title. Every driver has good luck, and bad.

In the 'what if' category, Webber and Vettel SHOULD be MILES ahead of everyone. You can't 'what if' only one driver. The fact is that Ferrari have the 2nd fastest car (for a good portion of the season), but have not been able to score points at the same rate as McLaren (i say McLaren, because they definitely seem to have the knack this year of scoring higher than they 'should')

Oh, and WHAT IF Ferrari were not allowed to fix their engines?

Agree with you.

The thing for me in this article its like trying to justify Alonso/Ferrari form. The team (including him) have not deliver like they should with that car.And if in fact he was trying to make the point of the idea that Alonso isn't far from the championship he fail when he try to say what if this and what if that.Said the facts and the consequences of mistakes of both the team and him and stop wondering of a fake world.

Hamilton breaks a rule, gets a drive-through, and loses nothing thanks to a leftfield strategy from Kobayashi.The very next race Alonso break a rule, gets a drive-through, lo-and-behold he's at the very back of the field.

I think that's extraordinarily unfortunate, right there.

"...if things had worked out in any way reasonably" is less defensible but in the context of the article it's OK if a bit fanboy.

Alonso has had great luck so far this season at Bahrain (inheriting the lead because of Vettel's mechanical issue), China (SC), Monaco (SC) and Barcelona (inheriting second place because of mechanical problems for Vettel and Hamilton who were both running ahead of him at the time), so unless that sentence was placed in the context of his earlier good fortune it is liable to give an entirely misleading impression.

In my opinion he's still marginally in the black, points wise, when you weigh up the good and bad things that have happened to him this season. He himself has subsequently admitted that he didn't do a good enough job in overtaking slower cars at Montreal, where he carelessly allowed both Hamilton and Button to pass him. I think he - and not the Ferrari team as a whole - was also to blame for not immediately giving the place back to Kubica at Silverstone - he is a veteran of ten seasons who knows the rules well enough and was just trying it on.

If Hamilton was deliberately cheating in hesitating slightly before overtaking the Safety Car a fraction of a second too late at Valencia goodness only knows what words can be used to describe Alonso's actions in haring off down the track after cutting the corner to pass Kubica on the pretext that he'd been forced off the track. Since when was the legality of the other driver's actions a criteria when deciding on breaches of that particular rule?

The only bad luck he can legitimately complain about over the past three races has been in the timing of the Safety Car deployments at Valencia and Silverstone which cost him points - but slightly less than he gained from Bahrain, China, Monaco and Barcelona.

felipe would have been a wdc if not for the SC in singapore, or for the engine blow in hungary, his own mistake in malaysia, or for glock holding hamilton 500 more meters,obviously arguments exist for the other side too

the what if championship would be probably tied with everybody on full points.alonso is not having his best season, that is right, but it's not like ferrari have done wonders and he's screwing up. he may have lost some points here and there but I don't think the car had any chance to lead the wdc until now

For me that's the main point. In Silverstone the difference from Vettel to Alonso in Q3 was over 8 tenths, the same difference Alonso had over a Sauber in 9th place on the grid.Granted, Ferrari has a little better race pace than their qualy but still... In my view Alonso's and Ferrari's mistakes and fortunes are not going to be a factor at the end of the year. But you never know what's going to to hapen and that's why we keep glued to the tv every other sunday.

the quintessence was that alonso has been lucky (in the first paragraph) and that part i interpreted to be nothing to do with putting words out of context!his interpretation was out of context!

You've clearly not read his post at all, focussed on a small part you don't like, and taken it out of context with the hope that you will discredit the entire argument. Have you read the article we are discussing?

I don't suppose you will agree with much of what Wheelbanger posted anyway, but at least comment on it having read and understood the discussion properly.

What is so hard to understand in next statements: Alonso was lucky to inherit win in Bahrain, was lucky with Safety car in China and Monaco, was lucky in Spain when inherited two place due Ham and Vettel? Perhaps you think that is just part of racing, but then again, you should also see his misfortune - like in Siverstone - as part of racing, eh?

Also, why do Alonso fans raise such a noise about Hamiltons lucky escaping from punnishment when he overtook SC? It hurt other title contenders as much as it did hurt Alonso, I haven´t heard Vettel or Webber or Button or their fans crying about it at all, why is that? Howcome that incident was more harmful for Alonso than it was for others?

felipe would have been a wdc if not for the SC in singapore, or for the engine blow in hungary, his own mistake in malaysia, or for glock holding hamilton 500 more meters,obviously arguments exist for the other side too

the what if championship would be probably tied with everybody on full points.alonso is not having his best season, that is right, but it's not like ferrari have done wonders and he's screwing up. he may have lost some points here and there but I don't think the car had any chance to lead the wdc until now

McLaren shouldn't have either, Red Bull should be, but who are top with cars that shouldn't be?Don't forget that Fernando has qualified in the top 4 at every race apart from Malaysia(team error, win possibly lost), Monaco(crash, win lost according to FA), and Turkey(underperformed). Add to that Fernando's "relentless" race pace, and we have a combination that should have been right near the top.

What is so hard to understand in next statements: Alonso was lucky to inherit win in Bahrain, was lucky with Safety car in China and Monaco, was lucky in Spain when inherited two place due Ham and Vettel? Perhaps you think that is just part of racing, but then again, you should also see his misfortune - like in Siverstone - as part of racing, eh?

Also, why do Alonso fans raise such a noise about Hamiltons lucky escaping from punnishment when he overtook SC? It hurt other title contenders as much as it did hurt Alonso, I haven´t heard Vettel or Webber or Button or their fans crying about it at all, why is that? Howcome that incident was more harmful for Alonso than it was for others?

What is so hard to understand in next statements: Alonso was lucky to inherit win in Bahrain, was lucky with Safety car in China and Monaco, was lucky in Spain when inherited two place due Ham and Vettel? Perhaps you think that is just part of racing, but then again, you should also see his misfortune - like in Siverstone - as part of racing, eh?

Also, why do Alonso fans raise such a noise about Hamiltons lucky escaping from punnishment when he overtook SC? It hurt other title contenders as much as it did hurt Alonso, I haven´t heard Vettel or Webber or Button or their fans crying about it at all, why is that? Howcome that incident was more harmful for Alonso than it was for others?

What is so hard to understand in next statements: Alonso was lucky to inherit win in Bahrain, was lucky with Safety car in China and Monaco, was lucky in Spain when inherited two place due Ham and Vettel? Perhaps you think that is just part of racing, but then again, you should also see his misfortune - like in Siverstone - as part of racing, eh?

Also, why do Alonso fans raise such a noise about Hamiltons lucky escaping from punnishment when he overtook SC? It hurt other title contenders as much as it did hurt Alonso, I haven´t heard Vettel or Webber or Button or their fans crying about it at all, why is that? Howcome that incident was more harmful for Alonso than it was for others?

That is an easy question to answer.

Vettel was already ahead of the SC, Webber was getting a ride back to the paddock and Button said he benefited from the SC.

Can someone please jog my memory as to why Alonso was lucky with the safety car in China. IIRC, there was an early safety car and he served his penalty after that which sent him well done the field. He also pitted about 5 times in that race. What I do remember was him charging through the field like a mad man though.

It's not the content of the article, which is really about not counting Alonso out, which we can't. It's the headline that's the issue. "Why Alonso should be leading the championship". I don't really think that Tony Dodgins truly believes that Alonso should be leading the championship, but as a writer, you need to make articles that stand out - I know I read the article, mainly because I thought the headline was completely wrong. That's what Tony Dodgins wants, that's what Autosport wants - page views - and that's why there's such a daft headline put on the article.

Vettel was already ahead of the SC, Webber was getting a ride back to the paddock and Button said he benefited from the SC.

Next?

But the point Alonso/his fans were complaining about was not Vettel being ahead and thus being "lucky" (you make your own luck: qualify high enough and get a good start to be ahead others) the point Alonso/his fans were complaining was the fact that "WDC contender LH got more points than he should have" and thus Alonso needs to work even harder to beat him this year. If Hamilton had had his penalty immediately, he would have dropped either right behind Alonso or right infront of him, so Alonso lost One frigging point at most because of that. The real reason for whining - from both Alonso and his fans - was that Hamilton is running away in WDC because he didnt lose any points with the penalty. My question is, why didnt Vettel, Webber or Button or their fans make a noice about it? Doesnt it hurt Vettel, Webber, Button as much as it hurts Alonso if Hamilton scores points he shouldnt have?

Have you ever thought that everybody else (except Alonso and his fans) in the world can understand that it was just a lucky escape for Hamilton due to circumstances and they are fine with it - because things like that keeps happening all the time - it comes and goes, sometimes you benefit of it, sometimes you suffer for it, that´s life.

What is so hard to understand in next statements: Alonso was lucky to inherit win in Bahrain, was lucky with Safety car in China and Monaco, was lucky in Spain when inherited two place due Ham and Vettel? Perhaps you think that is just part of racing, but then again, you should also see his misfortune - like in Siverstone - as part of racing, eh?

@ bahrain: it was some luck to gain that position due to a defect, but the possibility to win it so or so was there!@ china: you call china luck: 5 pit visits @ monaco: you call monaco luck, because he couldnt start in qualti, coz of a crash in fp?@ spain: that was luck: because he had no chance to take those places without failures on other cars!

The real reason for whining - from both Alonso and his fans - was that Hamilton is running away in WDC because he didnt lose any points with the penalty. My question is, why didnt Vettel, Webber or Button or their fans make a noice about it?

1. no one is whining2. vettel and webber fans do point out the misfortunes (maybe not in this bb, but there are some other bb, too )

@ bahrain: it was some luck to gain that position due to a defect, but the possibility to win it so or so was there!@ china: you call china luck: 5 pit visits @ monaco: you call monaco luck, because he couldnt start in qualti, coz of a crash in fp?@ spain: that was luck: because he had no chance to take those places without failures on other cars!

@ Bahrain: possibility to win is not same as win. I for dont belive for one second he could have pass Vettel on track for first place.@ China: bad luck with 5 pit visits doesnt nullify the good luck he had with SC.@ Monaco: he blew his own chances with a crash in free practise, that is not bad luck - that´s bad judgement. Then he lucked Heavily because of SC.@ Spain: True, that was pure luck.

My impression was that there was a great deal of whining from Alonso, and the rest of the Ferrari camp, over this. I'm sure if we were to look back over all the posts, here on this BB, we would see an enormous amount of whining. The same in the press, and in terms of complaints made to and about F1 management. As a newbie to F1, I'd not heard the term Waaalonso, or Cry-Baby Alonso, before this season. I've looked at many BB's since, and it seems to be in common usage. The fact that these types of terms are only found in relation to Alonso seems to imply that a lot of whining has been observed, in comparison to other drivers.

So, surely, someone is whining? It can't be imaginary, by so many people?